Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | pastage's commentslogin

You might choose to not have control. The reason people protest is because we should have more control over the things we own. Sure this might create a better market for alternatives but it is worse for most people. F-droid is spectacular.

Interesting concept, seems like it is a way to pay less taxes as an artist, not really a pay but it will make it easier to live. Not sure about the selection process though..

> Self-employed in culture can be given the right to pay social security contributions from the state budget.

https://e-uprava.gov.si/si/podrocja/izobrazevanje-kultura/za...


The link is totally irrelevant, it's about filing taxes and the right to pay to the social security fund not about the income you receive while you have the status. Yes, you get an extra tax break (taxes aren't paid on the money you receive from the state), but that's not the main point.

If there are other ways artists get support do you have a better definition one can search for? Considering it talks about supporting artists I feel it is relevant to the situation in my country. Getting help with social insurance is pretty important in many countries, and something I know many artists have problem with.

Copyright is what it is, the guy is distributing wav files which I guess are the original ones. It is done in blatant disregard for copyright so the argument is solid. Just because you have another view does not mean we have to accept that view.

There are few people who seriously recommend less than 25-years of protection.


Might be all of that infrastructure paid by oil, on the other side of the border in a not that remote of an area (10people/km²). We have absolutely had power outages lasting several days.

Tradition says that this is not true but honestly I have no real experience except I have done the calculation for our roof. According to our local building standards at 60⁰ you basically have zero snow load, I am not sure what angle a shallow angle roof is but 30⁰ is max load. 6kN/m² is a lot of extra strength.

In Finland, where you can easily get 30cm or more snow, all roofs are required to stand 100-300kg/m2 by law and most roofs are less than 30 degrees (e.g. 1:2 ratio).

A-frame or even 45degree angle roofs are very rare.


30cm is just kinda cute. Try 600cm - you'll find a lot of A-frames up the mountain, where they routinely get >700cm of snow each year and generally no thaw until spring. Alaska, similarly, but there you'll find more domes and steep-roofed chalets, since it gets proper cold (-40) and insulation uber alles is the rule.

The other benefit of an A-frame is that the snow drifts deeply enough that winter-only cabins don't need as much insulation, because there's a 4m drift on all sides except the front.

Those kinds of places are also where you find "doors to nowhere" on the 2nd floor, because that's the winter access. One door at ground level for summer, one door ~1.5-2m up for winter.

I love visiting, but I'll never live there!


I read this as in Finland you can get 30cm snow in a day. And the second person is comparing that to 600cm in a year. Am I right?

Total accumulation matters in roof design, not single-day dumps. The mountain I'm referring to (and others like it) can get 100cm+ single day, but that's not super common.

Helsinki, for example, only gets a total of ~90cm a year. So the mountain sees more snow in a single event some years than Helsinki all year.


Just looking at a map though, and Helsinki is on the south coast. It appears Finland extends right up to the Arctic circle. I would guess they get more snow up there? Any Finns like to chime in?

https://en.ilmatieteenlaitos.fi/snow-statistics

Upwards of 80cm in finnish lapland, so quite a bit of snow, but not the ~2-3 meters common in the high sierras and cascades. This is mostly because the elevation is low and the sea exposure is smaller (wind blows from the pacific over the mountain and dumps snow). The Paradise Snowtel on Rainier, for example, routinely has 3-6 meters / 10-20 feet of snow in winter, and is one of the snowiest places on earth. The only place I'm aware of that has more is Aomori Prefecture in Japan and they have similar geography.


The only limit to how strong you can make a roof is really money. If you space joists or trusses half as far apart you will about double the max snow load.

At a certain point the problem stops being the roof, and starts being subsidence of the ground under the increasingly-heavy building.

That would be a LOT of snow.

With 60⁰ there is no snow accumulation at all but 35⁰-45⁰ pith roof will not hold all snow either. After it will accumulate some amount of snow (depending on the weather and an exact pith but rarely more than 50cm) snow will start to slide down.

The subsidies for cars is crazy when you look at it from that perspective. What you need to do is invest a lot of money in areas and systems that can make it better over time. In the end you are going to spend less.

You get fast control with gas, I have cooked a lot with gas that instant enveloping heat is nice! New electric stoves are in my view superior, because they are less messy and have even better control.

Induction is more responsive than gas

This article is about heating a house, not a pot.

Even older electric stoves are fast at control as long as it's an induction and not basic electric.

MacOS is a better desktop in the sense that the desktop is locked down. GNOME trie to be the same as MacOS but being the default desktop for nerds and build for people who lives the Apple way makes it a bit schizofrenic.

As a Linux lifer I agree that the hard diamond surface of the Mac desktop has a solid feeling to it. The Linux way is harder and also more brittle. Windows and Linux are both better than MacOS even as a desktop as long as you do not look at the in the wrong way. The thing is I have only minor problems doing that on either Linux or Windows, but the walled garden of the Mac, Android and iOS is a joke.

MacOS is designed to be a somewhat stable desktop, that is good. It is not a better Unix, it is a political stance that means hacking will forever die.


I don’t know anything about “hard/brittle” analogies for operating systems. What I do know is that Linux distributions don’t seem to have a coherent strategy for building an operating system with sensible defaults and a consistent design that makes it easy to use for non-technical users.

Linux developers seem to almost-universally believe that if the user doesn’t like it or it doesn’t make sense then the user will fix it themselves either via configuration files or patching the source code. That model works fine for users with a lot of knowledge and time on their hands. In other words, it’s an operating system for hobbyists.

MacOS, for all its faults, is still pretty easy to use (though not even close to the ease of use of Classic Mac OS 9 and earlier).


Apple developers seem to almost-universally believe that if the user doesn’t like it or it doesn’t make sense then the user will... just have to learn to live with it.


I never said the Mac was perfect. Far from it. But it has sensible defaults which the vast majority of users find acceptable and easy enough to use.

Linux users, on the other hand, seem to spend more time customizing their operating system and sharing screenshots of it than actually getting work done.


You are encouraged to play with footguns on Linux, I do not do it and none of my family do it works fine for us. On "Linux desktop" one of the things you are not encouraged to play with is installation of programs. The Linux way is preferable that is why Apple and all the other are walking down the same path.

Not being able to install things sucks, but when you do you will easily destroy your nice shiny brittle desktop. The pebkac is strong here, but making the users enemies is a bad solution, this is why Google, Apple and MS are all bad desktops.

As I said I have been a Linux user my whole life. I know it works as a desktop but it works best with either people who do not care about instaling stuff, or thise who care enough to get it working.


you’re welcome to your opinion of course, mine differs.

I’ve been using Linux since it came on a root and boot floppy. I remain completely unimpressed with its desktop design, ease of use, and (especially) accessibility. It’s a fantastic server OS.


> DNS broke my site for three hours. But now I actually understand it

I have been broken for three decades and I still don't understand DNS. It is a simple protocol but people use it in complicated manners.


Simple? Oh no. Simple it is not.

It's the most baroque protocol that is still somehow surviving from the initial Internet. There are so many weird limitations, like not being able to use CNAME for apex zones. Or the entire DNSSEC fiasco.


I think CNAMES were a mistake, think of them as lightweight NS records. It is a simple protocol solving a rather complex system. I have respect for simple things I have tried implementing my own server, did not go well.


why you need DNS for at server? just use hosts file. why your server would need to resolve domains on the internet? client yeah, server no.


> why you need DNS for at server? just use hosts file.

IP's can change without warning.


You have to go back five decades if you want to use a host file. My point is that cache and making are the three hard things in computer science DNS has had both problems several times. I choose DNS over hosts files every time.

EDIT I might be off by one here.


interesting.

But it's not an issue at all, and it provides a convenience that can be depended on by a lot of your dependencies.

Code may use domains instead of ip addresses (which provides resiliency), package managers like apt depend on domains. And so on.


clusters and other load-balanced workloads. who wants to maintain hosts files across a fleet of containers or multiregion load-balanced situations?


One can also say we do too little for children who get mistreated. Taking care of other peoples children is never easy the decision needs to be fast and effective and no one wants to take the decision to end it. Because there are those rare cases were children dies because of a reunion with their parents.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: